A little bit more than patriotism. A little bit lower than jingoism. ---
Nirendra Dev

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Maulana Azad – the low-profile man who almost saved India the Partition

In politics, an oft
repeated statement is as much they change, as much they would remain the same.
In the season of who has ‘stolen’ whose history, thanks to certain assertive
moves on the issue by the Modi regime, the birth anniversary of Abul Kalam
Azad, freedom fighter and country’s first Education Minister, passed off in a
low key affair.

This also justifies
the allegation that over the decades, India’s ruling elites have tried to keep
all glories for one family primarily and occasionally agreed to share the
limelight between two ‘surnames’ – Nehru and Gandhi.

Born on November 11,
1888, Abul Kalam Azad certainly did not get his due despite the blowing the
trumpet on serving the country’s minorities. Azad was not only a minority
community leader but a great nationalist and one of the main organisers of the
Dharasana Satyagraha in 1931. The former AICC president had emerged as one of
the leading limelight carrying the conviction of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose in
espousing Hindu-Muslim unity, the true secularism and welfare of the
downtrodden, the true socialism.

With Gandhi & Nehru

Azad was
president of Congress party from 1940 to 1945 and during this period the Quit India rebellion
movement was launched at the personal interest of Mahatma Gandhi.

Thanks to
friends like Arun Kumar Shah and Paromita Acharya for liking the question.
There were no comments, however.

Well, even if
this query did not generate a debate; perhaps the next issue from the pages of
history I would refer would generate some interest.

The last
date for the nominations for the post of the President of Congress, and thereby
the first Prime Minister of India,
was April 29, 1946.

Gandhiji
had already made his choice widely known.

A popular BBC snap on Partition

In fact,
9 days before on April 20,1946, Gandhiji had written to Azad expressing his
displeasure on media reports about Azad’s willingness to contest for president
of Congress and thereby possibly move an inch towards Prime Ministership.

“Please
go through the enclosed cuttings.… I have not spoken to anyone of my opinion.
When one or two Working Committee members asked me, I said that it would not be
right for the same President to continue…. If you are of the same opinion, it
may be proper for you to issue a statement and say that you have no intention
to become the (Congress) President again…. In today’s circumstances I would, if
asked, prefer Jawaharlal. I have many reasons for this. Why go into them?”

So
that’s history for all of us!

But to
me, the Quit India movement timing and Azad’s opposition is more perplexed an issue and
that is why I am plunging into this article.

An
assertive Azad was perhaps creating a sort of panic and insecurity in Team
Mahatma Gandhi – comprising Gandhi himself and his two lieutenants Sardar
Vallabhbhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru – if not in Mahatma himself.

In 1924 at Ahmedabad session, the Swarajists lobby comprising C R
Das and ironically Motilal Nehru (Jawaharlal’s father) had opposed Gandhi’s
idea that members who did not spin for half-an-hour a day and did not observe
the five-fold boycott of legislative councils, law courts, government schools,
titles and mill made cloth would have to resign from the All India Congress
Committee. This resolution, if carried, would have excluded the Swarajists from
power.

Again in 1939, Gandhi’s supreme leadership position in 1939 was
threatened by Subhas Bose when Gandhi's candidate Pattabhi Sitaramaiha.

Later M N Roy wrote, “Gandhi’s tormented soul made him acknowledge
after the election ‘Pattabhi’s defeat is my defeat’”.

Thus, it would not be erroneous to believe that by launching Quit
India movement, Gandhiji wanted to strengthen his grip over Congress party.

In retrospect, even Azad as Congress president had tried to
persuade Gandhiji not to launch Quit India movement in 1942, which even
otherwise was realized later had failed to achieve any ‘tangible result’.

1942 was politically a crucial year in Indian history. The Cripps
mission under Stafford Cripps made an attempt in late March 1942 to secure
Indian cooperation and support for their efforts in World War II.

Cripps worked to keep India ‘loyal’
to the British war effort in exchange for a promise of full self-government
after the war. Had Congress leaders under Gandhi accepted this, the partition
could have been avoided.

Even Mohammed Ali Jinnah had “accepted”
the Cabinet Mission's
proposals. Had this worked, perhaps, India's unity would have been
preserved and partition avoided. But the course of human history is often
predestined.

In later years, the country had to witness a gory partition marked
by unprecedented killings and arson and worse, the ‘hatred’ that has continued
till today.

Thus in hindsight, the country should
recall in all humility the efforts made by Azad to preserve its unity. On his
part, Azad’s various predictions made in his famous speech in Jama Masjid area
in Delhi about Pakistan has come true.

Azad had warned
about “incompetent political leadership” that would pave the way for military
dictatorship in Pakistan
as it has happened in many Muslim countries.

He had also
cautioned against absence of friendly relationship with neighbors and the
possibility of armed conflict (with India)
and the ‘collapse’ of the very idea of Pakistan. He
has perhaps proved more than right.
(ends)

About Me

Author of 'Rainbows and Misty Sky: Windows to North East India';
'HEART ALONE' (A collection of short stories), 'Modi to Moditva: An Uncensored Truth' and other books, 'Ayodhya: Battle for Peace' (2011) ‘Godhra – A Journey To Mayhem’ (2004) and ‘The Talking Guns: North East India’ (2008).